...there are many phenomena that I do not see as they can be explained by the pushing gravity, such as the following:
- the advance of periastron of the elliptical orbits
- the symmetry of tidal motions of matter with respect to the body center
- the gravitational deflection of light near a massive body (gravitational "lensing" effect), and so on.
Because the Newton's and general relativity's gravitational theories are certainly valid and proved by a big number of experiments and evidences...
Thank you for your thoughts,
No, surely not valid, because any action on matter can act only some kind of other matter, radiation, particles bearing some impulse and so on. The space in not a matter, like the mathematical (geometrical) plane, line, sphere or a parabolic hyperboloid. Its not matters at all.
Relativity give a good description on the seemed, the apparent reality, mediated by light, which is not the true reality just a mockery.
Yes, proved, that was seemed by us with the aid of light photons. But we know that the objects are not there where we see them, because its going speedy, and/or there are under influence of strong gravitational gradient.
This question peaked around problem of time dilatation, because in other fields we cannot prove what happen in the true reality. And see miracle: it is no any experimental evidence, that is the time goes in other kind manner in relativistic conditions. Why? Because the Hafele Keating experiment is simply a fraud.
There is two another, quite shorter durations experiment with aeroplanes, when was taking back the clokcs to the surface.
Any other type of experiments, where the clocks was not returned to Earth surface, the time discrepancy can be shown during flight only, including mesons, cyclotrons and so on.
The rest is a GPS. But you heard about any GPS clock was taking back to surface (USNO) ever ?????
So genaral relativity is not validated, just we histerically believes that the speed of light is a maximal speed (why? because we never sees higher speed with the aid of light, which light has a light speed?), believes that the geometry can act on the matter, and believes that we neednt take back any GPS clock, because we can see the relativistic GPS time satisfactorily, during its circulatory travel.
This two point is quite similar in a pulling or a pushing case. Its absolutely the same condition whether a force vector push or pull a point.
Pushing gravity offer a physical explanation, the cause is the DVAG gradient near bodies. Relativity gives not a physical interpretation, just geometrical, its not a real causal, just a misterious geometrical explanation.
The arguments against pushing gravity, like Poincare, is ridiculous, because we do not know the exceptional features of gravitons as a fundamental energy (quantum) particle, so we cannot predict any of features of gravitational (gradient) space.
The root of the matter, pushing gravity serve a simple, physical, real explanation of real gravity in contrast to relativity which descript the semblance (which suitable for many purpose, but hide the reality, which has significance in cosmology, black holes etc)
I read your article about gravity. ...my question is why should gravity be regarded as a pulling or pushing force? Didn't Einstein prove that space-time itself is warped or curved by the presence of matter? Wouldn't that mean that there is really no force ... only bent space-time fabric ... like a wrinkle in a piece of cloth? Any object would then simply move along the curvature because there is nothing else it can do without external force being applied. This is how I imagine Einstein's General Theory of Relativity.
thank you for your reflection, and yes nearly everybody thinks so, just a small trouble that Einstein (in 1916) bent the pure, empty mathematical vacuum-space, which would generate force (acceleration of bodies). In opposite case, if gravity-field fill up the space, only in this situation we could manipulate the "space", and could be a result of an APPARENTLY curved space. This apparent bending is a result, not the cause. If the vacuum space lacking gravity (= empty), it is laughing to bend the nothing...
And after that, no singularity, no need comic inflation, Universe need not arise from nothing (from one mathematical point), because it should never collapse into one mathematical point, no reason for that. And no philosophy. Just a new cosmology. Simple. Understandable. Physical.
Only in case of pulling gravity, Universe should emerge from one point (from nothing), need a hypothesized inflation, shoud hypothesized anti gravity somewhere far far away, not here. Should hypothesized an absurd crooked gravity emitted, which goes far away, touching a body, and pull it back. Or bending the nonexistent space. No. This is only the appearance. The cause is: the gravitational (quantum field , zero point energy, dark energy etc) energy field flows into the barionic matter, (atoms, planets, stars etc) heating them continually.
The best examples are the black holes. Gravity streams into black hole, and at the event horizon the light stopped, like a fish is swimming opposite the flow of river.
Every other things of matters flow with gravity field streaming into the black hole. Like a vacuum cleaner sucking the air. Around the vacuum cleaner do you think space is curved?
So, I think the horizontally rotated MM interferometer (perhaps floated in mercury) should no display any change in stripes, because its generally rotated in wrong direction !! Always, in the usual way, where the two arms compensate any change in fringes during rotation of interferometer.
The Earth knows the adequate direction of rotation !!!
What does it mean? We shoud rotate MM interferometer around an axis of one arm !!!! And not the usual way, where the rotational axis is perpendicular both arms and both arms rotates in horizontal plane around a vertical axis.
On the grounds of Munera experiment I can prognosticate, when somebody turn MM interferometer around one arm as axis, so one can demonstrate fringe shift. As Silvertooth can demonstrate shifts with his one-route interferometer.
If it would be true, it would be fatal on relativity.
..an electron is a torus.. Orbits what? Orbits the positron? No, in the torus, the graviton (half, or an elemental graviton) rotates as a ring (a circle). Around this circle orbits a charge particle (spiralling around graviton) creating the torus surface.
Inside the photon the situation is the same: the charge particle spiralling around graviton(half) and the other charge particle spiralling around the mirror graviton(half).
There are one other frequency where the same graviton-charge particle pair can close to a ring: this is the antiproton torus.
The mirror graviton and positive charge particle pair forms proton (at the same frequency)
This is NOT the situation inside the photon. Inside the photon NOT exist electron nor positron. Photon contains the constituents only.
1. torus is in the "normal" material world, only. Stable particles only toroidal, as electron, positron, proton, antiproton.
2. Gravity (gravitational push) is NOT toroidal. The cause of gravity is graviton (mirror) pairs, with helical form, even line movement.
Stable particles (above list) not moved anywhere, stayed inside of atoms or exists freely eg. electrons. If you not accelerates it, they normally stationary.
Photon move normally with velocity c, photon also stable, not looks like a toroid, but more or less looks yin-yang in its cross section.
Graviton pairs NOT toroidal, they goes in an even line, helical path looks like DNA. The velocity is much more higher as c, I guess million times.
Graviton alone (not in pair) situated inside any torus as a core, moving looks like a circle, draw along with him one charge particle.
I dont know the mechanism, how graviton can take it, how be able to push matter with this horrible force of 1.2x10^44 newton.
Im glad if you want to understand everything what I say, please take all questions what you think. (I dont know everything, naturlich)
Waves can pass right through each other in opposite directions. Which waves? Water waves? Or sound waves in the air? Waves can interfere each other, which means that opposite waves can extinguish each other, eg if air pressure fronts "collides": NOT pass right through !!
Photons can interfere each other also, NOT pass through without any effect, contrary: they have effect to each other. Could you detect what happen with single photons if its may incidentally collides ? No. Moreover the photon diameter extraordinarily small. Extraordinarily.
No, there is no medium which would propagetes photon like air or water waves. The "medium" is only a radiation sea. Not propagates photon but construct it, not mediated but transport it. In an even line.
1. Aether is just a light wave transmission medium. It is like the electric field is an electric force transmission medium.
2. Pound and Rebka use light resonator box. This box resulted in the energy of the light wave increasing and they hastily concluded that: the frequency of light waves increased.
3. M-M's experiment results in variable speed of light and you should respect their conclusions. Im sorry to say, but I cannot agree with you as a whole, because
1. the aether is a high velocity radiation of graviton energy-particles with extreme high penetration through barionic (normal) matter. No any drag. The velocity is about a million times as speed of light (c).
2. Pound and Rebka measured the "dropping" light from 22.5 meter to a detector at bottom. He can measure the velocity increment of photons.
3. yes, the speed of light is not constant, that is what PR showed up with his marvelous experiment.
3a. yes, the speed of light at bottom is c+v where c = speed of light (horizontally measured) and v = "aether wind velocity"
3b. this aether wind velocity means, that the graviton radiaton force a little bit higher downward than graviton radiation coming from bottom, through the Earth. This small difference between very huge forces cause the gravitation phenomena and the apparent "aether wind"
4. the Michelson interferometer not suitable for observation of "aether wind" when it is rotated in a usual way.
5. aether wind can be observed by Silvertooth one-way interferometer, that can show Earth rush with velocity of 370 km/sec in the direction to Crater/Leo constellation.
6. space does not exist, so Einstein coud not bend spacetime if it is not exist in reality. It is just a mathematical model, no more.
tank you for your article sent me
1. aether cannot be a propagation medium, simply on the following reason: one photon ejected in the distance of ten thousand thousand thousand lightyears away. The sound spread 3 dimensionally but you compare light conduction in aether medium to sound. In that circumstance the light should be loss energy exponentially with distance. It is does NOT happen !!!
The light photon energy is the same as where is ejected originally. Please understand this before answere me.
The photon energy not decreased. The light density decreased with distance, not the individual photon energy. The photon density decreased.
The photon energy decrese only very very small degree, that is the redshift. This is far far smaller than it should be, compaired to energy loss with spheroidal spreading of photons.
Once again, if one photon would spread spherically so its energy should loss quadratically with distance.
So photon cannot be propagated by medium (as sound). This idea is fals.
The real aether is a graviton radiation. The light photon is simply a pair of graviton connected with two electrical charge fundamental energy particles (+ and - electric charge particles). This photon spread in line, not spherically as sound. http://astrojan.eu5.org/light.htm
2. PR observed the increased speed of the falling photon, so the photon cannot absorbed in bottom Fe57 isotope. When PR move the Fe57 downward with appropriate speed (compensating the photon velocity increment) so the Fe57 can absorb falling photon again.
PR could not understand what they measured really. They want to prove Einstein idea.
3. No. MM interferometer not suitable for the desired observation in the usual manner, Im emphasized usual manner, turning is on a liquid mercury surface.
4. the proof is the Silvertooth observation. Marinov also can display Earth velocity compaired to aether with simply a washing machine motor.
5. Marett can NOT repeated Silvertooth experiment, because his device was not the same as Silvertooth. Marett device was NOT turnable !!
Marett introduced himself the apparent deviations, because he need to wait for his results until Earth turned to requested position. Silvertooth simply rotates his table, so he need not wait for temperature, humidity, pressure etc deviations. So Marett observations are a very important confirmation of the Silvertooth experiment.
I know the answer, because the wave models are wrong. Only the particle model able to explain how could light move millions of lightyears without loss of any energy in a homogenous vacuum (which is full by graviton radiation). Einstein does not matter what he said, the photon is a 4 component energy particle, a graviton pair which carry a fundamental electric charge energy particle pair, which move with velocity of c in high distance from bigger mass. The cross section pictures of photon trajectory is the ancient yin yang symbol.
Forget the wave models, this real photon model able to explain
- how does it works the photon,
- why circularly polarized, R and L photon.
- how could produce positron and electron in pair production,
- why has dual nature of light - behave once as particle, on another occasion as wave,
- why coherent a laser beam etc,
in context a torus model of the barionic matter, which able to explain
- how could emerge spin of particles,
- how could emerge mass property of matter
- why has dual nature of electron or proton - behave once as particle, on another occasion as wave,
- why electron has an integer charge despite of quark theory 1/3 or 2/3 elemental charges,
- why stable the electron and proton (as well as positron and antiproton or even the photon)
- why not stable the other composite particles (not perfectly circulars)
- why stable the graviton and electric charges (because they are fundamental energy particles), and so on.
The Nature is not complicated just until we cannot be understand it. It consists by only two fundamental energy quantum particles.
The photon is a particle, an energy quantum consist by four fundamental particles: two (mirror)graviton energy particles and two (mirror)electric charge energy particles labeled positive and negative, circulated around own graviton particles. The graviton pair alone cause the gravitational phenomena, pushing gravity. Its a speedy, perpetuum mobile particle, travels in a DNA like trajectory. When this pair bind two (mirror) electric charge fundamental particles so the photon emerged.
The cross section of moving photon particle shows yin yang symbol. So this anim not a rotating yin yang symbol but contrary, the ancient yin yang symbolize the nature most importance ingredient, the photon.
The laser beam stabilized by this intrinsic electric forces because if we label the distance between adjacent photons with d in the crystalline grid, so distance between the same neighboring charges are always d, while the distance between opposite charges is always smaller than d.
The https://astrojan.eu5.org/phot3.gif picture shows how arise photon periodically changing properties, once electric and after a quarter of wavelength magnetic nature originated from the internal structure of a photon.
where the vertical line position of the four ingredient correspond to electric property and the square position shows the magnetic property of photon perpendicularly to former one.
In consequence, the photon is not a wave, the wave function is only a periodical, sinusoidal change of the properties of the speedy photon particles we can observe from the outside.
I think no other model can explain how functionate the photon.
Perhaps not incidental that Corean wiki site incorporated the laser anim picture. For them the yin yang somehow a very important (ancient) symbol. Why? There is the answer (by me).
Please help me how I can make more understandable and clearer illustration of particle model of photon.
Astrojan (talk) 06:18, 2 September 2021 (UTC)